|
Apr 29, 2005
Adoption - A "Rich" Tradition
Adoption - A "Rich" Tradition
Adoption has become rich with tradition. Mother's Day is approaching and the day before it has been designated "Birthmothers Day".
"Birthmothers Day"? That seems odd - aren't all mothers honored on Mother's Day?
What is a "birthmother" anyway? What is the definition of "birthmother"?
"Birthmother" is a dehumanizing term, promoted by the adoption industry, that makes it seem as if a mother is nothing but the packaging a baby comes in, meant to be tossed aside. When she is called a "birthmother" or "birthmom" a mother's role is demoted to that of a "birth object" - similar to a placenta.
There are so many people hoping to adopt a healthy infant - and many businesses that profit in some way by getting babies for adoption. A mother who is vulnerable - single, young or temporarily without resources - is often targeted as the source of a baby to be used for adoption.
She may be led to believe she must be like Abraham, who showed his loyalty to God through his willingness to trust in the Lord and sacrifice his own son. Lucky for Abraham, God only tested his willingness and did not force him to follow through - the test was horrendous enough.
A mother may be led to believe she must be like God, who "so loved the world that He gave his only son so others might be saved." The ultimate sacrifice.
While other parents sacrifice FOR their children, a "birthmother" sacrifices her child so someone else can have the experience of raising him. That's not exactly true, you say. And you are right. Because it is not the intention of the mother to sacrifice her child. A mother who is naive is led to believe she is sacrificing FOR her child by giving him up - indeed, it is a painful thing for a mother to lose her child to adoption. But she and her family have been exposed to constant advertising, promoting adopters as "loving" people - veritable angels or saints. Many people believe that no one can love a child like people hoping to adopt, that adopters deserve someone else's child. So to make the adopting people's dreams to adopt come true, a mother is denied any acknowledgement of her motherhood. Instead, she is led to believe she should be honored as a "birth object".
After being severely chastised for being so irresponsible as to "get herself pregnant" (presumably the male is not accountable), a mother is made to feel lucky for the smallest kindness. And in return for some small kindness, she must agree to hand over her child. Later, they will say she "just didn't want" her child.
"Birthmothers Day" honors a woman's "Birth Objecthood" and dishonors her motherhood. It may become another marketing opportunity, with adopters buying women gifts of jewelry, cards and other trinkets to honor their "birth objecthood". The more rituals that build up around adoption, the more normal it will all seem.
The wealthy are purchasing the children of poor or naive families. Domestic Infant Adoption - it's become a "rich" tradition.
Posted at 05:54 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 28, 2005
Unwanted Babies for Adoption
Adoption of unwanted babies?
There may be some unwanted babies in the world, some mothers who are so drugged up that they cannot possibly care for their children and never will be able to. The grandparents of these children may be exhausted and unwilling to take in any more babies, not even their own grandchildren. The fathers are nowhere to be found. The babies, born unhealthy, may be abandoned at the hospital and even prospective adopters (who claim they will love an unrelated baby as if she were their own) pass these babies up in hopes of finding a healthy baby - a "chosen child".
There may be some unwanted babies - and yet many of the babies adopted today are taken from college students, from mothers and father who are clean, decent Christian women and men. These babies are not "unwanted" by their families. The mothers and fathers want and love their babies but they have been influenced - or even forced - to "give their babies up" for adoption by strangers. Why? It's true the adoption agancies and adoption attorneys are making money providing "adoption services". But in addition to the business aspect of adoption, there are cultural reasons for this transfer of babies. The real parents have been deemed "unfit" simply because they are single. Christians may not recognize single parents as parents because they do not meet the "family unit" family type. To Christians with these beliefs, it does not matter how much money the families have or how many resources they have available, the child is considered to be "worse off" because of her family. The child will be "better off" with married people - any married people - rather than her own mother, father, grandparents and future or existing siblings. It is the belief of many organized religions that society that will be so "improved" by giving a child a family-transplant operation that the child and her natural family simply do not matter at all. To further devalue it, the child's family is referred to as "unstable" - as if there were some mental deficiency. Indeed, in the 1950s and 1960s single white mothers (derisively called "unwed" mothers) were considered mentally disturbed and their "unwanted" babies were routinely taken to "fix" their mental condition. And of course the babies also had a use - to meet the market demand for healthy white infants.
In many instances, adoption is not about unwanted babies, it is about unwanted family types.
A culture of adoption has been promoted, with it's own lexicon called "Positive Adoption Language" in order to facilitate the transfer of children from one group (clans which include single parents) to another (family units). This is a genocidal act, an act to decimate one culture in favor of another. And worse than that, it adoption causes great suffering for most of the families being decimated. Sometimes a mother who has been used as the source of a baby for adoption commits suicide. But even if she does not, it will still be very painful for her over her lifetime not to have the opportunity to raise her own child. The consequences of separating a mother and her baby for adoption are known. Even with open adoption, there may be intense suffering.
Promoters of adoption insist that there are lots of unwanted babies for adoption - and by suggesting "open adoption" they can find even more babies. How do you suppose an adopted person feels, hearing over and over how she was "unwanted", considered to be nothing but a "crisis"? Adoption agencies may say "We must emphasize to that these children are WANTED - they are WANTED by their adopters. This is a fine way to build up the adopted person's allegiance to her adoptive "saviors" - and increase her feeling that her natural family "just did not want" her. Adopters, I have a question: Is this "loving" an orphan - or "loving" yourself?
Where family type is concerned, it is ironic that organized Christian religions so often promote the idea that a single mother and her baby are not "worthy" of recognition as family members. At Christmastime, believers honor the Mother and Child - the single Mother and Child. Mary agreed to a pregnancy when she was single and a young teenager. God chose her and she accepted God's blessing. Joseph stood by Mary and did not feel the need to "teach her a lesson" by deserting her or devaluing her motherhood. But even if Joseph had abandoned her, would that make Mary a "birth object" meant to be used as the source of a baby for adoption? Today people might say Mary "made poor choices" and insist that she "give up" her child for adoption. At Christmastime we might be honoring the "Wealthy Adoptress and Child" rather than the "Mother and Child".
"A child needs a father" is the statement so often made. But every child has a father - her father should be expected to take responsibility. But even when one parent abandons his or her child, that does not mean the other parent and the child's entire family should be taken from her.
Unwanted babies for adoption? Now you know the rest of the adoption story.
Posted at 10:33 am by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 27, 2005
Adoption - What Breed?
Pregnant women, watch out! There is a huge market for babies - a market for babies for adoption. Adopting a baby is almost a fad, with aging lesbian women or infertile couples discussing what "breed" of baby to get: The "Chinese" breed, known for "it's" intelligence, or the "African American" breed which will demonstrate to the world your kindness and consideration as a white person. Perhaps the Korean breed would be the best. Or the Cambodian or Russian breed. Then of course, you might as well pick a country you want to visit so you can get in a little vacation in addition to adopting your new human pet.
No matter what breed a person chooses to adopt, the sellers - er, "adoption professionals" - always certify that the babies are orphans. Of course if you checked into it you might find out how these babies were intentionally turned into orphans (at least on paper) so that you - the wealthy American - would have a baby to puchase and use as if she were your own. The great thing about adopting a baby internationally is that you think you need not worry about "birth parents". They will be at a safe distance, just like you want your mother-in-law to be.
When you marry, you get a whole new set of relatives to deal with. Your husband might care about his relatives, even if you don't. Likewise the adopted child might care about her family, even if you don't. Saying to the adopted person "I adopted YOU, not your natural family" is as short-sighted as saying to your husband "I married YOU not your family - and expecting him to forget they exist."
Of course the adopted person's "function" is to please the adopters. Just like a woman in the early 70's who may still have been putting her husband's wants and desires ahead of her own needs - as if her only function were to serve him - the adopted person often puts the wants and desires of the people who adopted her ahead of her own needs.
Occasionally I mention to someone the effects it can have on a family when an infant family member is surrendered to be used for adoption. The loss of a child to adoption affects people for life. Fathers are ashamed that they abandoned their child's mother. Mothers are saddened or even traumatized by the loss of their infant son or daughter - compounded by the fact that it is not socially acceptable for them to grieve. Siblings - existing or future - are all affected by the loss. Mothers who have lost a child to adoption tend to treat the other children differently, either being distant or holding on too tightly. The effects of adoption last a lifetime. Even open adoption affects a family. All the "Positive Adoption Language" in the world does not make it better.
These are just a few things to think about when considering what breed of baby to adopt.
"Adoption may be hard on the natural moms," one woman wrote me. "But the adopted kids seem to be just fine." Not all adopted people are so happy about it. But even if they were that's kind of a humorous justification for adoption, isn't it? Sort of like "Well, I stole your car, but don't bother your pretty little head about it - because I took good care of it."
But a human being is not an object like a car, a human being has family.
Adopted persons may say that adoption is better than the alternative. The "alternative" - they assume - is death, abortion. No wonder these adopted people are so happy - they believe they have been "saved" from the firing squad, from the butchers knife, from some horrible fate. I wonder what an adopted person would say if you asked them would it be better to grow up in a family with loving people who are related to you or with loving people who are unrelated to you? Would it be better to grow up with your siblings, to hear stories of your own ancestors? Or is it better not to know?
Posted at 07:03 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
Positive Adoption Language is Disrespectful Language
Positive Adoption Language is Disrespectful Language
Something called "Positive Adoption Language" is being promoted in America - promoted to journalists and the media, to teachers, to health professionals and to the general public. According to promoters, "Positive Adoption Language" is your PAL.
We are told that "Positive Adoption Language" is "respectful". If "Positive Adoption Language" is respectful, then to what entity is it respectful?
In America, there is a large market for babies for adoption. Adoption agencies and adoption attorneys profit from finding more babies for people. When there are not enough real orphans to be found, they work to tear families apart to get babies.
With "Positive Adoption Language" people who are not "parents" in the legal or any other sense are being called "parents" - or even "real parents" - far in advance of even "finding" a baby to adopt. Meanwhile, the REAL parents - who are parents in the legal sense and also the biological sense - are referred to as birth parents" (aka "birth objects" or incubators) in advance of their baby even being born. This dehmanizing terminology makes real mothers and fathers seem as if they were nothing but the source of a baby for adoption. It also makes prospective adopters feel entitled to take someone else's child.
Consider the psychological consequences of adoption. Adoption - where a child is separated from and forced to deny his own family.
The commandment says: "Honor thy Father and thy Mother." It does not say "Honor thy Father and thy Mother - but ONLY if they are raising you." How can the adopted person comply without offending his adopters?
Inherent in it's design, adoption disrespects a child's mother, father, family and heritage. The original birth certificate is filed away and a fraudulently amended birth certificate generated, showing the adopters as having given birth. Just imagine if the same thing happened when a man got married - he could wipe out potential "interference" from his in-laws in advance simply by denying they are related to his wife. Of course, his wife might be a bit offended if he is not willing to accept her family. But to fix that, perhaps a "Positive Toward the Man's-Side-Of-The-Family Language" could be developed to make it seem as if a wife's family were not her family.
Adoption is a wonderful way to make a family .... cry.
Positive Adoption Language is biased language, disrespectful of natural families. To prevent families being torn apart, Positive Adoption Language must be replaced by honest language, language that is not biased toward adopters.
Posted at 02:03 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
"Birthmother" Courage
Grrrrhrgh! Roooaaarrh! Birthmother courage, courage to "give up" your own baby for adoption. Wow, THAT's impressive. Who's kidding who? You promoters of "birthmother courage" are mainly either a) male or b) heartless infertile bitches or c) heartless gay or lesbian bitches.
Sure, I used BAAAAD language. But aren't you guilty of calling a mother a "birthmother" - meaning "birth object nigger"? "Birth objects" are designed to "produce" babies for you to use for adoption, are they not?
It is YOU who use bad language, you who lack courage to live your lives as decent human beings without stealing a mother's (whom you call "birthmother's") baby to use for adoption.
True, school-boy bullies often steal a younger child's lunch - and they feel good about it - they feel powerful. And that is how it must be when you get a mother's ( and father's) baby to use as if she was your own - you feel powerful. You have mastered her, emotionally raped her. What a MAN you are, what a display of courage.
"Birthmother courage." What a crock of shit. A crock of shit promoted by Christian people.
Jesus would love you adopters - as a source of ironic humor. Jesus' mother was "unwed", poor and a very young teenager. Would you have taken Jesus mother from him and sold him for adoption?
THAT would take guts, for sure - selling the "Jesus-bastard".
God the "birth-object father" might smite you down, satan!
Mothers, you are not "birth mother birth objects" - you are the mother of your own child. Pregnant? Try to find the help you need to keep you baby.
Posted at 12:05 am by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 26, 2005
"Birthmother" Stories
Personal adoption stories are just that - personal - so it’s surprising anyone tells their story at all. Just hearing the word “birthmother” or seeing the word “birthmother” is enough to upset many moms who have been used as if they were only the source of a baby for adoption. Is a mother a "birthmother" (aka "birth object")? No, a mother is the mother of her own child.
Still there are a few so-called “birth moms” who have been willing to share their stories, accounts of how their infant sons and daughters were obtained for adoption by strangers. Then later the grown "babies" found their moms and in a few cases - repatriated into their natural families with their true heritage and ancestors.
There are lots of adoption stories written by adopters…adopters like to show off their “generosity” in taking in a “homeless orphan”. Unfortunately, most of these “orphans” had families that loved them. But whenever there is a market for babies, there will be adoption agencies and adoption attorneys “stepping up to the plate”, finding ways to get babies away from their own mothers. Getting babies adopted. Creating even more of those tragic adoption “birthmother” stories.
Adoptee stories are often tragic as well. It seems the happiest adoption stories are told by adopters, soon after adoption - before reality sets in. Although we’d all like to think adoption is a perfect solution to everyone’s situation “everyone benefits from adoption” the fact is that not everyone benefits from adoption. The adoption businesses may benefit from adoption - the businesses with the websites that have hokey, made-up, contrived “birthmom stories” - where the mom says she’s 18 but writes like someone with a career in advertising. The adoption businesses benefit financially from adoption - or rather from selling babies.
Then you hear that silly “adoption vs. abortion” argument - as if a newborn baby were about to be slain by his mother and must be adopted - quickly - to prevent a murder. Hello, people - that baby you are adopting is already born - you have not saved her from anything - you have just taken advantage of a vulnerable mom and denied this little baby the love of her own family.
Moms in Ireland have their Birthmother Stories, telling how they have been used to provide babies for the adoption market.
Moms in Australia have their Birthmother Stories as well. What is this disenfranchised adoption grief?
Posted at 10:50 am by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 25, 2005
Adoption Issues
Adoption issues are often discussed from the point of view of the people who have adopted or who intend to adopt. Adoptees and natural family members have a struggle being heard.
Even though the adoption businesses claim that adoption is for the child, the “child” -or even adult adopted person - is often silenced when she dares to speak up about the adoption issues that are important to her.. Not wanting to incur the wrath of her possessive adopter, an adopted person may be intimidated to speak of her natural family. She may simply mention a desire for a health history and let it go at that. Many adopted people have spent their lives making their adopters happy and it is a tough habit to break, tough to attain independence.
Natural family members have an even harder time making their voices heard. Yet the adoption issues they bring up are equally valid ones. After having cared for relatives children, for friends, for the neighbors, for the elderly, for dying parents, and everyone else they encounter it may one day occur to them that when they themselves needed help, there was no one there for them. Considered “mere women” and unworthy of notice, their babies - a valuable commodity - were simply taken from them and adopted-out. In some cases, psychological tricks were used to make the mother think it was her “choice”. Shown no mercy - and sometimes battered by their parents - single mothers in certain communities and cultures have been “guided” toward adoption for decades.
Today, a savvy pregnant woman can find some information on the internet to back up her case for keeping her child. Yet, many women still find this information - and real help - too late. Having heard all their lives “everyone benefits” from adoption, they may believe it’s true. It’s easy to take advantage of someone who is suffering from morning sickness and other effects of pregnancy. The adoption agencies and adoption attorneys lure pregnant mothers in, making promises. Getting a mother to select prospective adopters well in advance is a common trick. It will make it harder for the mom to say “no” to these seemingly kind people later even after she holds her beautiful son or daughter in her arms. When she hesitates about her adoption “choice” they may remind her that they have a whole nursery all set up - and she hasn’t prepared even have a single baby outfit or a car seat to get her child home. Making promises of “open adoption” has proved to be so successful at luring moms in that adoption businesses are expanding and charging more for their “services”.
One very important adoption issue is the issue of the dehumanizing language used for mothers, fathers and other natural family members. The right to the care, custody and control of your own child is an “inalienable” right, a right that should be impossible to surrender. To make people forget this fact, mothers are dehumanized as “birthmothers” (aka “birth objects”) and adopters are called “parents” or “real parents” - even before a baby is found for them.
To make the job of finding babies for adoption easier, adoption professionals have lobbied and gotten federal government grants for Infant Adoption Awareness Training. Some states have “Choose Life” license plates, with the proceeds going to get more babies for adoption but never to help a mother or father who wants temporary help to raise their own child.
Mothers and fathers who are so easily duped deserve to be scammed - andit doesn’t matter how the children are affected. At least, that is the opinion of many people in America. While it is considered unethical - even criminal - to offer a family $15 for a baby in Cambodia, mothers in United States are being offered scholarships, car payments, dining expenses, and much, much more to lure them in. Ads soliciting for babies are everywhere. “Dear Birthmother” letters and adoption business cards are called “outreach” as if finding babies for adoption were some kindly missionary work, rather than solicitation for someone’s son or daughter.
These adoption issues are important ones. And there are many other issues related to these adoption issues: sperm and egg donation, embryo adoption bring up even more issues. Naïve college students are solicited for “donations” and are not told the truth about the fact that they are selling or donating their own offspring. They are lured in by the businesses that profit from these unnatural “reproductive” techniques. Sadly, the donated/adopted person may have even less support and understanding than an ordinary adoptee. And, what can a person who was sold by her father or mother - possibly to obtain beer money - have to feel grateful about?
There are many adoption forums, and you might think adoption issues might be discussed there. But too much honesty will get a person banned from the forum. A seemingly “open forum” is often only a highly censored advertising tool.
More open adoption issues and "unwed" mother myths.
Posted at 03:41 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 24, 2005
Human Life is Precious as Gold for Sale
Human Life is Precious as Gold for Sale
“Human Life is precious” - that is the message we often hear: “Human Life is precious”. We all know how delightful it is to hear a small child laugh or to look into the trusting eyes of a newborn. And when we look into the eyes of our own son or daughter our joy is even greater. But beyond the intrinsic value of a human being there is an economic value as well. Will there be enough younger workers to keep the social security going? Will there be people to purchase all the manufactured goods and all the “services” and pharmaceuticals? Will there be enough people - with the right skills - to defend our country?
Human Life is precious . However to many entities human life is precious only because of the income that can be realized from a human life - it is the “price tag” that makes human life precious. This is especially true now that so many people are putting wealth and their own interests first and waiting too long to reproduce. Aging, desperate for a baby - and sometimes quite wealthy - some infertile people will pay any sum in order to get a baby “of their own”. Singles and gays also hope to adopt or otherwise obtain an unrelated child. This is great news for adoption businesses and for those businesses who broker the raw materials needed to create a baby - including human eggs, human sperm and now even frozen human embryos.
Human life may be considered “precious” but any real respect for human life has gone completely down the drain. Human life is no longer intrinsically precious.. “It” is precious based on “it’s” DNA, looks, health and potential. “It’s” ancestors are usually not even mentioned or if ancestors do happen to be mentioned they are referred to in dehumanizing terms as “genetic parent”, “birthmother” or “birth family health history”. In an attempt to get more raw materials to make babies and more babies for adoption, the very real human life from which the “desired life” springs is demoted to the lowest status possible, the status of a breeder of babies for the wealthy.
Many “Christian” people insist upon decimating families that are not of the “family unit” type. They rationalize that forced adoption is better than forced abortion - the only two “choices” they are willing to consider for families with single parents. For males, offering only these two “choices” is ideal - because it means that males need not concern themselves with either pregnancy prevention or with taking responsibility for their own child if they are not married to their child’s mother.
Churches love to promote the phrase “human life is precious” - but unfortunately it seems even for churches, the economic value of human life trumps the intrinsic value of human life. It’s hard to believe that the “experts” are not aware of the harm they cause mothers and their children when they are separated for adoption. For churches, providing “adoption services” is a great “fund-raiser”. “Adoption services” nets them plenty of donations (for this “charitable” work) and of course the church adoption agencies charge fees for “counseling” services designed to get more babies for their real clients, the adopters.
They say "things have changed" - but with adoption things have not changed except to become more devious and competitive.
Rather than churches helping the poor, churches remove the healthy, desirable babies of the “poor” (often naïve Christian college students) and sell the babies as indulgences to those whose marriages are not “blessed by God”. In earlier centuries, when people could not reproduce their marriages were annulled. Infertility is not a measure of “goodness”. Infertility may be the result of STDs, overweight, environmental toxins, bad habits like drinking or smoking, drug use or may result from an infection following an abortion. For males, even holding a laptop on their lap can lead to increased body temperature and infertility. Yet, churches seek to “save” these marriages through the sale of human life.
And because churches have been promoting adoption and selling human life for so long now, how can people comprehend that making even more “artificial orphans” through adoption or reproductive technologies will cause suffering? It’s not a desirable thing to be an orphan, cut off from family. Do Americans really want to fund “Embryo Adoption Awareness Training” making it so that clinics will be encouraged to make more “spare” embryos in order to offer them for sale? Do United States citizens want “reproductive tourism” to the United States which is known for allowing it’s citizens to be used as incubators and as the source of raw materials to make babies?
Human life used to be considered more precious than gold but now Human Life - is only precious as gold for sale.
Posted at 01:54 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 23, 2005
Adoption vs. Abortion
Adoption vs. abortion - hot, painful, ouch! what a subject.
What a touchy subject adoption vs. abortion is - how can anyone contest THAT? Yet, as with any debate, if the premise is flawed the whole argument is worthless.
The premise - that there is a “choice” between adoption and abortion - is very much flawed. Why? Well, let’s compare it to the options of killing yourself or going to a technical school. If you kill yourself, you cannot go to a technical school - you cannot do anything because you are dead. Likewise, if a fetus is killed, the fetus cannot go to technical school, cannot be raised by her own mother or father, cannot do anything because the fetus is dead. But (going back to you ) suppose you do not kill yourself - then you have many options - you have not “chosen” technical school just because you did not commit suicide - you can go to technical school, you can go to South America, you can become a marine biologist, a midwife, a teacher, a philosopher or a combination of things….the opportunities and options are endless. And so it is with abortion - if there is no abortion, the options are limitless. Hello, I said the options are LIMITLESS. “Adoption” is only ONE option.
The flaw in the argument about abortion vs. adoption is obvious. Terribly obvious. There really is never a “choice” between abortion and adoption. Because by the time a baby is born the options are keeping her, shared custody with her father, temporary guardianship by her grandparents, etc, etc. - or (last place) surrendering her for adoption by unrelated people who have purchased “adoption services” designed to get babies away from their own families so other people can adopt.
Pressuring moms to surrender their infant sons and daughters for adoption is common - how else can infertile people and gay people and single people get themselves a healthy baby to adopt? Making moms feel worthless as mothers, making them think they have “saved” their babies from abortions - just because they foolishly handed them over to unrelated people - is a handy psychological tool used to get more babies. More babies for adoption, more money for the adoption agencies and adoption lawyers - and more donations for them as well.
Abortion vs. adoption? If you don’t want an abortion, you probably love your child more than life itself and if that’s true - you deserve more options than just adoption, open adoption - or any kind of adoption.
Posted at 05:54 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
Apr 22, 2005
Adoption Reform
Many people in America are suggesting adoption reform ideas. Adopted persons, people hoping to adopt, adoption businesses and natural family members all have ideas for adoption reform.
Adult adoptees - are usually called "adopted children" well into their 50's - seek adoption reform. "WHO AM I?" is a big question in the mind of many a person who has been used by an unrelated person as a fill-in for the child they could not have.
An adopted person may not say they are suffering from the loss of their natural family. The adopted person may not be suffering - or it may be that they are suffering but do not want to think about it. An adoptee may be unable to experience, express - or fully comprehend - their feelings. Some adopted persons timidly say they want a "birthfamily medical history", fearful of an eruption of emotions and accusations of "ungratefulness" on the part of their adopters. Some may amend their request to say they want this medical history for their descendants (as if it would be rudeness to their adopters to want such a thing for themselves).
Adoption businesses seek adoption reform so they can get more babies for their customers - the prospective adopters. Prospective adopters themselves seek adoption reforms in hopes of more easily getting themselves a healthy infant to adopt. The adopters nearly always intend to deny the adopted person's natural family exists - or is of any importance - pretending the purchased child came out of nowhere to serve the adoptive people's needs. Was the child purchased? No, we are told - the adopting people purchased "adoption services" - and it just happens that the "adoption services" were designed to get a baby away from her own family.
It's no wonder then, that natural families whose infant sons and daughters - or siblings - or grandchildren - were taken to be "sold" to adopters are suggesting adoption reforms. Outlaw all this solicitation to get babies. Get rid of the "Dear Birthmother" letters. Give moms, dads and families plenty of time to consider their options after their babies are born.
Perhaps the most important reform that is needed in adoption is the use of honest language that acknowledges mothers and fathers as mothers and fathers - rather than biased adoption language that makes it seem as if mothers and fathers are merely "birth objects" meant to be used as the source of a baby for adoption.
Another concern with adoption reform: Where can you get help for a so-called "crisis" pregnancy - if you want to keep your baby?
Learn more about the coercion in open adoption as well. Remember, for the adoption lawyers and adoption agencies, adoption is a business - a way to make good money and perhaps attain "angel" status - nothing more.
Posted at 12:43 pm by warriorwoman
Permalink
|
|
